OPINION OF EUROBELARUS: EASTERN PARTNERSHIP CIVIL SOCIETY FORUM: PARTICIPANTS SELECTION PROCEDURES

Less than three month is left before the first meeting of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (the provisional date was selected as mid-November 2009). During this short period of time it is necessary to select participants of the Forum and to resolve the outstanding issues of institutional interaction between the structures of the Forum of the Eastern Partnership and the formal structures of the EU. Many acute problems in one way or another were resolved in the Concept paper of the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership[1], which outlined the key objectives and activities of the Forum, set a framework for engagement for the Forum with the platforms and committees of the Eastern Partnership, pre-defined structure of the Forum. Despite of the progressive nature of the set mechanisms in the Concept Paper for the civil society of the Eastern Partnership participating states, there is still a number of unresolved or insufficiently transparent moments. Such as, above all, the issue related to the selection of participants of the Forum. The delicacy and complexity of these issues does not allow for hoping that an optimal solution will be found for all, however a satisfactory solution could still be found.

Description of the Forum participants’ selection procedures

The European Commission has recently highlighted the following procedure for selecting participants of the Forum. It involves two stages: the first, creating a database of interested CSOs (based on an open invitation of the European Commission on expression of interest) and the second, selection on the basis of «clear and transparent criteria». These criteria are defined as follows: (1) geographical origin (the majority of members must be from the Eastern Partnership participating countries), (2) diversity and proportional representation of civil society actors (trade unions, employers' organizations, professional associations, non-governmental organizations, think tanks, national and international networks of CSO / CSO network and others); criterion also requires the ability of CSOs to contribute to the work of all thematic platforms of the Eastern Partnership; and (3) experience in matters relating to the EC/EPC/EP (based on past and current activities and achievements). In addition, it is noted that while applying these criteria in the course of the selection process the European Commission would take into account particular features of each partner country.

Comments on the proposed procedure

While the first stage of the procedure is simple and obvious, the second is more complex and a number of issues and tasks are left open:

1. Who will exercise the final selection of the participants of the Forum? The Concept Paper refers to the fact that the European Commission could establish a «Steering Committee» in order to organize the Civil Society Forum, which would include representatives of the country presiding in the EU (EU Presidency), the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and recognized independent personalities. This «steering committee» will become responsible for the selection process. It is obvious that the existence of such committee (as well as the procedure of the selection itself, as opposite to ‘election’) is a compromise, taking into account difficult conditions for the implementation of democratic procedures in the partner countries. Nevertheless, in order for the work of the Committee to comply with the principles of openness and democracy it is necessary that:

• individuals-members of the «Steering Committee» were not regular appointed officials however officials bearing responsibility by own name and reputation (politicians and prominent public figures, intellectuals). The names of all the members of the « Steering Committee » shall be made public and all potential participants of the Forum should know them.
• the selection procedure should be as open and public as possible. In particular, there should be an opportunity to provide with written justification of the selection of one or another CSO, which expressed its interest to take part in the Forum, as well as there should be an opportunity to appeal.

2. Certain criteria identified in the Concept paper need further elaboration. Their current format would not guarantee the transparency of the selection process. To a lesser extent it concerns the criterion (1) geographical affiliation. More questions rise criteria (2) diversity and proportional representation, and (3) experience in matters relating to the EC/EPC/EP, as well as issues concerning «particular features of each partner country». Let’s look into these issues in more detail.

Geographical affiliation. This criterion requires the introduction of quantified indicators to ensure proportional geographical representation with regard to partner countries, EU countries and to third parties.

Diversity of representation. This requirement should allow for representation of the widest possible range of the civil society actors. It is obvious that it should be interpreted as a negative criterion, i.e. that the applicant can not be denied participation solely based on the fact that it is not a representative of the common form of NGOs. The diversity criterion should not be applied on the principle of «Noah's Ark» - the mandatory inclusion of all the different actors of the civil society. On the one hand, it is not feasible and, on the other hand, one should be aware that many partner countries of the Eastern Partnership do not have full range of civil society institutions (in the European sense) and that not all organizations applying for the CSO status obtain it.

Proportional representation. In this case, it is also not clear how to interpret and how to ensure that proportionality. Does it mean ensuring proportional representation of actors of the civil society at the Forum, i.e. in accordance with the breadth of distribution of any type of CSOs at the national level (20% of professional associations for all types of CSOs at the national level, providing them with 20% of the seats at the Forum)? Perhaps at the first stage it is important not to have proportional representation of all segments of the civil society but rather include all the most active and interested stakeholders. While the actual role and significance of the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership is just at the beginning of its implementation the representation of really interested stakeholder should be strengthened.

Experience in matters relating to the EC/EPC/EP. There is a need for more precise elaboration of what kind of experience will be considered and how to establish the existence of such experiences (as well as the ability of CSOs to work on all the thematic aspects of the EP). One possible option would be a multi-stage procedure: (a) submission by a candidate of something like CV, (b) anonymous reviewing of the CV by other CSOs, and (c) a final decision of the «Steering Committee» on this criterion on the basis of the previous phases.

3. It is necessary to relate the principles of common selection procedures of all partner countries with the possibility of taking into account the specifics of each country. The mechanism adopted in the Concept for selecting participants is linked to the difficulties in organizing national forums, which most closely correspond to the principles of democracy and to the ideas enshrined in the Eastern Partnership. We are deeply convinced there is a need to take into account the level of readiness of the civil society partners to implement more democratic selection procedures. Supporting precedents and initiating moves towards the National Forum is a strategic task for the organization of the CSF of the Eastern Partnership. The civil society in Belarus has demonstrated its willingness to active consolidation and inclusion into the Eastern Partnership initiative. In Belarus there are real forces that seek to hold a national forum (congress, conference) of the civil society organizations as part of the selection process. In its course it is planned:

• to ensure the widest possible representation of the civil society of Belarus,
• to present and discuss applicants for participation in the Forum,
• to present and approve program proposals for the agenda of the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership, on behalf of the assembled representatives of the civil society of Belarus.

This national forum needs public support from the EC and from the formal structures of the EU, and its results would be formally incorporated into the process of selection of participants of the EP Civil Society Forum. These actions would allow continuing moving further towards more adequate, open and democratic procedures of selection of members of the Civil Society Forum and will contribute to the development of the democratic institutions in partner countries.

Typical errors that occur as a result of the selection process

This part is not directly related to the comments on the proposed by the Concept process of selection of participants. It looks into the typical errors, which were committed and still take place by international institutions and official structures of the EU during the selection process of consultants, experts or representatives of the Belarusian civil society involved in addressing important issues for the country. We would like to see these errors to be taken into account during the selection process of participants of the EP Civil Society Forum.

A) Error of delay. Since the socio-political situation in the country often changes faster than the approaches and programmes adopted by the EU, many really active personalities remain outside the attention of external actors. As a result, the candidates that are selected are often those not currently working on the issue however those who worked on it in the past.

B) Error of publicity. The country lacks a wide variety of free and competitive media and this media itself has low coverage. As a result, quotes of one or another candidate in the media tell nothing about his/her influence or about the real level of his/her competence. The excessive focus on the frequency of appearance in the media leads to the selection on random people.

C) Error of super-trust. Successful experience of interaction generates the natural relationship of trust between the representatives of the structures making selection and national leaders of the civil society. The lack of critical attitude leads to the selection of a candidate who has closer ties with the trustee, rather than one most suitable candidate. Recommendations of trustees should not be the sole and decisive factor in the process of selection of a participant.

(D) Error of breeding leaders. There is a tendency of promoting those people who receive special training, retraining, training within the European leadership programmes. I.e. there is a selection of particularly ‘own’ candidates or organizations as opposed to really relevant national staff or organizations.

E) Error of orientation on language literacy. In the former Soviet Union countries there is often a low level of foreign language literacy. Foreign languages are generally well known by people who received special education, or by people, career-oriented for overseas. Excessive attention to the criterion of linguistic literacy often becomes a barrier for selection of a candidate who is really qualified in the activities and on the subject field. The knowledge of foreign languages is indeed an important but not the most significant selection criterion.